Don't McBlock me
🔗 a linked post to
schneems.com »
—
originally shared here on
“That cannot be done.” Is rarely true, but it’s a phrase I’ve heard more and more from technical people without offering any rationale or further explanation. This tendency to use absolute language when making blocking statements reminded me of a useful “McDonald’s rule” that I was introduced to many years ago when deciding where to eat with friends. It goes something like this:
If I say to a friend, “I’m hungry, let’s go to McDonald’s” (or wherever), they’re not allowed to block me without making a counter-suggestion. They can’t just say “No,” they have to say something like “How about Arby’s” instead. This simple rule changes the dynamic of the suggester/blocker to one of the proposer/counter-proposer. If someone is simply refusing to be involved, they McBlocked me.
In practice, though, it’s hard to always have a suggestion you’re willing to run with, so a relaxed version of the rule is that the other person has to AT LEAST specify why not. Instead of “no” it must be “no, because”. For example, it could be “I had a burger for lunch” or “I’m banned for life after jumping on a table and demanding Szechuan dipping sauce.” This helps show that you’re not just blocking things, you understand the goal and want to move the conversation forward. It gives the other person something to work with.
I was literally thinking about this “rule” the other day and had no idea what to call it.
Ironically, I’m not sure how much I like “McBlock” as the word, but I can’t think of any alternatives. 😂